[osflash] MTASC Future
flashdev at relivethefuture.com
Wed Oct 26 11:16:45 PDT 2005
fair point, and if that is indeed true then someone may decide to play
devils advocate and publicly state that they will do various things to
determine their protocols and file format and see where the legal dogs
e.g. to create my new project SuperFlash5000 I aim to work out the avm2
bytecode, AMF3 protocol and RTMP. To do this I will analyse the output
of the compiler and network traffic relating to the protocols.
Then i will decompile the compiler, then i will decompile the player,
then i will decompile the whole flex builder 2 suite.
SuperFlash5000 will also create executable files that contain
implementations of all 3 and bundle the flash player.
then I would only do the things that they dont complain about
DISCLAIMER : I will be doing none of the above, I dont have the time for
any of it, legal or not.
hosey hosey wrote:
> It seems to me Macromedia cant state their position because if they made
> a legally binding statement and someone finds a way to stay within their
> statement, and they didnt like it, they would be screwed (thats no
> completely true but the gist is). By not stating anything they are
> leaving their options open. If they decide at any point (whether they
> are right or wrong) that they want to go legal on a project they can.
> Precedence has been set by not attacking prior OS projects so we can
> take heart in that, but it is not a safe haven.
> So in short: Macromedia wont state anything until absolutely needed.
More information about the osflash